More handpicked essays just for you.
Research essays on racial disparities in the criminal sentencing system
Research essays on racial disparities in the criminal sentencing system
Weaknesses of the US criminal justice system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Judicial discretion was prevalent over the first half of the last three decades, but has been regulated by legislature since 1984. Discretion by definition is the authorization of deciding as one thinks fit, absolutely or within limits (Ntanda, 1999). Indeterminate sentencing, traditionally, has afforded judges considerable discretion over the resolve of criminal sentencing. “While such discretion theoretically allows judges to tailor sentences to the circumstances of individual crimes and criminals, thereby achieving a sort of ex post fairness, it also permits variation in sentences that may not be warranted by the observable facts of the case, reflecting instead the judge’s own preferences” (Miceli, 2008, p.207). The punishment range of a defendant is typically based on the seriousness of the offense as well as the defendant’s criminal history which is dictated by sentencing guidelines. Judges, with few exceptions, are bound to select a sentence from the aforementioned range; however, as judges do retain some discretion it is the legislature that controls much of the sentencing as they establish the guideline that judges are to utilize.
In 1984, The Comprehensive Crime Control Act was passed by Congress, and thus created the United States Sentencing Commission. The primary objective of the United States Sentencing Commission was to reform criminal sentencing procedures in this country (Miceli, 2008). Criminal sentencing procedures required reform as significant disparities exist between defendants with similar criminal history records. The aforementioned statement would suggest that prior to reform that judicially imposed sentences varied across defendants in ways that were deemed unjust by Congress. “Congress has p...
... middle of paper ...
...s exist for the convicted and judges take these factors into consideration during the sentencing decision. Often time’s the age and poor health of an older offender has been considered by judges, and in some instances resulted in leniency during the judge’s sentencing decision.
Works Cited
Miceli, T. J. (2008). CRIMINAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES AND JUDICIAL
DISCRETION. Contemporary Economic Policy, 26(2), 207-215.
Mueller-Johnson, K., & Dhami, M. K. (2010). Effects of offenders’ age and health on sentencing decisions. The Journal of Social Psychology, 150(1), 77-97.
Ntanda, D. D. (1999). Minimum sentences and their effect on judicial discretion.
Crime, Law and Social Change, 31(4), 363-384.
United States, S. C. (2012). Report to congress: Mandatory minimum penalties in the federal criminal justice system. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 24(3), 185-192.
There have been different outcomes for different racial and gender groups in sentencing and convicting criminals in the United States criminal justice system. Experts have debated the relative importance of different factors that have led to many of these inequalities. Minority defendants are charged with ...
Furthermore, the “law and order” model was produced after a strong reaction between conservatives and liberal policies advocated by the national crime commissions. The conservative model originated in efforts to reexamine fundamental assumptions of the adult criminal justice system by a series of special study groups that began with the American Friends Service Committee publication “Struggle for Justice.” The committee’s desire to improve the predicament of prison inmates led to a report in 1971 that suggested that indeterminate sentencing and decisions about parole were conflicting and that they allowed biased judgment and improper criteria to control the timeframe served by inmates. Unfortunately, these motives for rejecting indeterminate
For a majority of the 20th century, sentencing policies had a minimal effect on social inequality (Western and Pettit 2002). In the early 1970s, this began to change when stricter sentencing policies were enacted (Western and Pettit 2002). Sentencing laws such as determinate sentencing, truth-in-sentencing, mandatory minimum sentencing, and three-strikes laws were enacted with the purpose of achieving greater consistency, certainty, and severity in sentencing (National Research Council 2014). Numerous inequalities involving race, ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status have generated an unprecedented rate of incarceration in America, especially among minority populations (Western and Pettit 2010). With numerous social inequalities currently
When an offender is sentenced to imprisonment, post sentencing considerations must be made based on an evaluation of the individual and this will determine the manner in which the prison sentence is served. Post sentencing considerations include security classifications, parole and continued detention orders. These offer different levels of incapacity, accessibility of rehabilitation programs and incentives for good behaviour, and are implicated in order to achieve justice through upholding the rights of the victim, the offender and the wider community.
The criminal justice system has been in place the United States for centuries. The system has endured many changes throughout the ages. The need for a checks and balances system has been a priority for just as long. Federal sentencing guidelines were created to help create equal punishments among offenders. Judges are given the power of sentencing and they are not immune to opinions, bias, and feelings. These guidelines are set in place to allow the judge to keep their power but keep them within a control group of equality. Although there are a lot of pros to sentencing guidelines there are also a lot of cons. Research has shown that sentencing guidelines have allowed the power to shift from judges to prosecutors and led to sentencing disparity based on sex, race, and social class.
Kansal, T. (2005). In M. Mauer (Ed.), Racial disparity in sentencing: A review of the literature. Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project. Retrieved April 12, 2005, from The Sentenceing Project Web site: http://www.sentencingproject.org/pdfs/disparity.pdf
Starting in 1970s, there has been an upward adjustment to sentencing making punishment more punitive and sentencing guidelines more strict. Martinson's (1974) meta-analyzies reviewed over 200 studies and concluded that nothing works in terms of rehabilitating prisoners. Rehabilitating efforts were discontinued. The War on Drugs campaign in 1970s incarcerated thousands of non-violent drug offenders into the system. In 1865, 34.3% of prison population were imprisoned for drug violation. By 1995, the percentage grew to 59.9% (figure 4.1, 104). Legislation policies like the Third Strikes laws of 1994 have further the severity of sentencing. The shift from rehabilitation to human warehouse marks the end of an era of trying to reform individuals and the beginnings of locking inmates without preparation of their release. Along with the reform in the 1970s, prosecutors are given more discretion at the expense of judges. Prosecutors are often pressure to be tough on crime by the socie...
This research essay discusses racial disparities in the sentencing policies and process, which is one of the major factors contributing to the current overrepresentation of minorities in the judicial system, further threatening the African American and Latino communities. This is also evident from the fact that Blacks are almost 7 times more likely to be incarcerated than are Whites (Kartz, 2000). The argument presented in the essay is that how the laws that have been established for sentencing tend to target the people of color more and therefore their chances of ending up on prison are higher than the whites. The essay further goes on to talk about the judges and the prosecutors who due to different factors, tend to make their decisions
“The Federal Sentencing Guidelines Manual states that one of the three objectives Congress sought to achieve in enacting the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 was “reasonable uniformity” in sentencing by narrowing the wide disparity in sentences imposed for similar criminal offenses committed by similar offenders (Spohn, 2013).”
To begin, Mandatory minimum sentences result in prison overcrowding, and based on several studies, it does not alleviate crime, for example crimes such as shoplifting or solicitation. These sentencing guidelines do not allow a judge to take into consideration the first time offender, differentiate the deviance level of the offender, and it does not allow for the judge to alter a punishment or judgment to each individual case. When mandatory sentencing came into effect, the drug lords they were trying to stop are not the ones being affected by the sentences. It is the nonviolent, low-level drug users who are overcrowding the prisons as a result of these sentences. Both the U.S. Sentencing Commission and the Department of Justice have determined that mandatory sentencing is not an effective way to deter crime. Studies show that mandatory minimums have gone downhill due to racial a...
...King, R., and Mauer, M., (2007). The Sentencing Project. Uneven Justice: State Rates of Incarceration by Race and Ethnicity. Retrieved from http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/rd_stateratesofincbyraceandethnicity.pdf
Sentencing is the process by which people who have been found guilty of offending against the criminal law have sanctions imposed upon them in accordance with that particular law. The sentence of the court is the most visible aspect of the criminal justice system’s response to a guilty offender. In Tasmania, the Sentencing Act 1997 was enacted to amend and consolidate the law relating to the sentencing of offenders. The crime rate in Tasmania is lower than it was 10 years ago but higher than it was 20 years ago. In the Australian context, Tasmania is below the national average of recorded crimes for the crimes of robbery, burglary and motor vehicle theft.
Sentencing models are plans or strategies developed for imposing punishment for crimes committed. During the 19th century these punishments were normally probation, fines and flat sentences. When someone was given a flat sentence, he or she had to serve the entire sentence without parole or early release. However, by the end of the 19th century the new models were developed. These new models include indeterminate, determinate, advisory/voluntary guidelines, presumptive and mandatory minimum sentencing (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2011).
The definition of justice and the means by which it must be distributed differ depending on an individual’s background, culture, and own personal morals. As a country of many individualistic citizens, the United States has always tried its best to protect, but not coddle, its people in this area. Therefore, the criminal justice history of the United States is quite extensive and diverse; with each introduction of a new era, more modern technologies and ideals are incorporated into government, all with American citizens’ best interests in mind.
... & Dhami, M. K. (2010). Effects of Offenders' Age and Health on Sentencing Decisions. Journal Of Social Psychology, 150(1), 77-97.